Parents have NO RIGHTS.... ONLY RESPONSIBILITIES....
Parents' Rights now gone with my Homosexual Marriage bill"
Contact & Friendly Parent Rule has to go to conform
to Judicial Practice, or Judges may be held in criminal BREACH OF TRUST"
the ideas that the State assigns
Responsibilities to it's Citizen is straight from pre-war Nazi
Germany. Under the British system rights are not
State-given, but God Given.
into the Court's position that what rights remain are Children's Rights,
is buying into the same position that "<Natural> Parents have no
rights", and Canadian Children are at birth the property of the Courts.
Ask a lawyer what "Common Law" is and they will
likely tell you it is
"Judge Made Law", and expand up this to say
"Common Law is whatever the Judges are commonly saying these days".
completely FALSE. The Judges are Agents of the Crown
and they BY DEFINITION Judges
are WITHOUT CAPACITY to make any law whatsoever. Since
1649, only PARLIAMENT
has the Capacity to make Law.
British Common law was NOT created by Judges, it was only observed
and documented by individuals sent out by the newly Norman Crown after
Norman Conquest of 1066 to observe and codify the laws and
customs of the various peoples of Britain.. This was done with a
view to aggregate existing customs which may vary across the land,
into a unified body of Laws. The Authority quoted by the Commoners
in their administration of
Common Law were frequently direct quotations from the
Bible and principles
The process of documentation took only a couple of
hundred years, and the product was a STATIC body of Law which was
historical, popular, and has served in the intervening centuries as a
Benchmark against which
Statutory Law may be measured for "Fairness".
It does NOT change.
Svend Robinson (right) cries while being supported by his partner
Max Riveron. Robinson claimed "stress" caused him to steal
the jewelry he intended to give his boyfriend. Robinson continues
to practice law in BC following a deal cut with his
Bill C250 added Homosexuals to the super class of groups in Canada's
retarded "Hate Law". who
can destroy in Criminal Court regular Canadians for exercising
Even France has rejected Homo-marriage (preferring
France's homosexuals to emigrate to Canada?!). International societies
of Women Judges & Lawyers appear to have designated Canada as the
globe's Homosexual habitat of choice:
Meijers Latest news about globalizing Homo-Marriage & Homo-Parenting;
Coming up: 26-29 June 2005, Toronto, Canada, the conference of the
International Lesbian and Gay Law Association (ILGLaw),
Fabian Society, Communitarian
"Wolves in Sheep's' Clothing"
Globalizing National Socialism (Nazism) since 1884
In June 1989,
Gisele Marie Goudreault, 46 disobeyed a court order to hand her son
Orey over to his father, Rod Steinmann of Ponoka, who had been awarded
custody. She fled with the boy to Mexico and lived there for four months
before moving to California. ... Justice Peter Martin condemned
which prevented Orey and his father from being together during the
child's formative years. "They had the right to know and
love each other. "That possibility was totally and irrevocably
destroyed," Martin said. "What this woman did to this man and this
child is every parent's nightmare."2004-02-19
US teen 'discovers own kidnap', BBC
FYI: A member has described a Luciferian Judge
(retired) who calls him up from time to time to discourage him
with Luciferian threats. Morneau's description fo the
"misunderstanding" that had Lucifer cast out of heaven,
and Lucifer's inevitable world conquest / NWO matches that of
the retired Judge as it was related to us by the member.
NOTE: You don't have to believe in "Spooks" to know that
Judges, University Professors & Public Officers who do are very
Morneau was involved in demon worship, lived in that world for
many months, and escaped alive. He is able to give us
inside information about it. It does not conform with popular
notes of who parttakes and what the activities are. Roger was
elected to be a member of an elite group of demon worshipers.
When he was about to be permanently initiated he asked for help
from higher powers to leave it alive. Interview with the famous
author of the book titled the same.
"ONE of Victoria's most
notorious sex offenders is suing to stop Christian courses
in the state's prisons because he says they discriminate
against his rights as a witch. Robin Fletcher, who is
serving a 10-year sentence for drugging, enslaving, sexually
assaulting and prostituting two 15-year-old girls
..... In his complaint, the self-proclaimed bisexual witch
calls for "Alpha" introduction to Christianity courses to be
stopped ... Fletcher, 49, says the course makes
negative remarks about witches, astrologers and occultists
... by provoking hatred of witches. ...... Fletcher
met his teen victims while a counselor. He drugged them and
told them their transformation into "dark priestesses of the
dark covenant" relied on them having sex with a different
man each week while he watched."
child porn could change, B.C. judge
<Mary Southin> says, April 27, 1999
Jurist speaks out
during appeal of controversial ruling
Vancouver -- A judge
of the British Columbia Court of Appeal
says society's attitudes toward child
pornography may prove as fleeting as
views in an earlier age on
"We have to recognize
that our views about these matters might
change radically. Society's view may
change radically over a very short
period of time", Madam Justice Mary
Southin said during the first day of an
appeal of a high-profile ruling that
legalized the possession of child
pornography in B.C.
Judge Southin is one
of three jurists on an appeal-court
panel that has been asked by the B.C.
government to overturn the ruling, which
held that production and distribution of
child pornography is still a crime but
simple possession is not.
In the ruling, which
has drawn international attention, Mr.
Justice Duncan Shaw of the B.C. Supreme
Court this year dismissed two charges of
possession of child pornography against
John Robin Sharpe of Vancouver. Judge
Shaw said Section 163.1(4) of the Criminal Code
-- which prohibits possession of child
pornography -- is not a reasonable limit
on freedom of expression guaranteed by
the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
repeatedly interrupted Crown attorney
John Gordon. In response to an argument
that Canada had international
commitments to fight child pornography,
she said she was uncomfortable
"pontificating" about whether street
children in countries such as Brazil
should be involved in the making of
pornography, especially since the
children may receive some money for the
"Some of these
people, whether we like it or not, isn't
it a fair assumption that they did it
for money? ... What right do we have
pontificating about what street kids do
She also questioned
whether the court should consider
whether criminalization of child
pornography was effective in restricting
exploitation of children. Referring to
[alcohol] Prohibition in the United
States, she said: "Look at the results.
It did not stop anything. It just made
Mr. Gordon said
criminalization may not be 100-per-cent
successful in eliminating child
pornography. "But you cannot throw up
your hands and say, 'What's the point?'"
He dismissed suggestions that Mr. Sharpe
should not be punished for his writings
because they are products of his mind,
not the exploitation of a specific
"It's all dreadful
stuff, very badly written", said Judge
Southin, but she added: "There are
graphic books written about rape, but we
don't ban them."
Mr. Gordon dismissed
Judge Southin's comments on society's
views of child pornography.
"Is society going to
evolve to the extent that material that
promotes and encourages the sexual abuse
and sexual exploitation of children
becomes acceptable?" Mr. Gordon asked.
"I submit not,
because children, like homosexuals,
deserve dignity, privacy, autonomy of
body. Child pornography is antithetical
to the rights of children." Judge
Southin also said she was troubled by
Canada's antipornography law because it
treats teenagers in the same way as
children who are 8 or 10.
"That's what troubles
me about this legislation", she said,
adding that she wonders whether
teenagers who are 14 to 17 can still be
accompanied by a friend, sat in the
centre of the public gallery during the
appeal proceedings, occasionally taking
notes on a legal pad. He said outside
the courtroom he felt he was doing a
public service by challenging the law.
"It's a bad law. Someone had to attack
it", he said.
Although Mr. Sharpe
represented himself in the lower court,
he has a lawyer who will make a
submission today to the panel. About 20
people, including Reform MP John
Reynolds (West Vancouver-Sunshine
Coast), attended the hearing yesterday.
Mr. Reynolds said
outside the courtroom he wanted to hear
the concerns about the antipornography
law. "If the law is not good enough to
prevent Sharpe from having the material
he has, then we have to change the law
to make sure it is", he said.
Council closes file in complaint against
BC Madam Justice Southin,
March 21, 2003
OTTAWA, March 21,
2003 – The Canadian Judicial Council has
closed a complaint file involving Madam
Justice Mary F. Southin of the British
Columbia Court of Appeal for smoking in
her office, having concluded that there
are no grounds for a finding of judicial
misconduct, the Council has advised the
author of a formal complaint against the
The judge's smoking and the installation
of a ventilation system in her chambers
that was done at the direction of the
B.C. Attorney General, "do not fall
within the ambit of judicial conduct
reviewable under the Judges Act",
Vancouver lawyer Dugald Christie was
told in a letter from Jeannie Thomas,
the Council's Executive Director. The
complaint was dealt with by the
Honourable Constance Glube, Chief
Justice of Nova Scotia and
Vice-Chairperson of the Council's
Judicial Conduct Committee.
Mr. Christie originally alleged that by
continuing to smoke and by accepting
changes to her chambers to accommodate a
ventilation system, Madam Justice
Southin had brought the administration
of justice into disrepute. In a further
letter of complaint, Mr. Christie argued
that Madam Justice Southin's dissenting
reasons in a recent decision in Reilly
v. Lynn were an "effrontery" to the
Supreme Court of Canada. He also argued
that the judge's conduct will give rise
to a reasonable apprehension of bias on
her part when cases are argued before
her by the provincial government or its
Crown corporations, because she will be
beholden to the Attorney General for
providing the changes in her chambers.
Chief Justice Glube also rejected these
allegations. She noted that the Council
has no jurisdiction to review whether a
judicial decision is correct or not, and
that the assessment of judicial conduct
is concerned with actual bias or actual
conflict of interest, not a reasonable
apprehension of bias. Mr. Christie was
advised that he had provided no evidence
of actual bias or actual conflict of
On the issue of smoking, the response
stated that B.C.'s Occupational Health
and Safety Regulations place the onus on
the Attorney General to control exposure
to workplace smoke by prohibitions,
restrictions or "other equally effective
means". In this case, it was the
Attorney General's decision as to how
the province would comply with the
The Council's procedures for dealing
with complaints about the conduct of
federally appointed judges may be found
on its Web site at http://www.cjc-ccm.gc.ca/.
Ms. Jeannie Thomas
Child porn will flourish without law, police warn,
April 27, 1999
B.C. court deciding whether man has right to
possess child pornography
VANCOUVER -- Police efforts to contain the
spread of child pornography in Canada will grind to a
halt unless the courts overturn a British Columbia
ruling that federal laws violated an individual's right
to freedom of expression, the British Columbia Court of
Appeal heard yesterday.
"They will be placed in a legal straitjacket and the
child-pornography industry will flourish", said Tim
Danson, a lawyer representing the Canadian Police
What the court is pondering are difficult legal
questions regarding where an individual's rights end and
where society's obligation to protect its children from
sexual exploitation begins.
Mr. Danson opened the hearings with an attempt to
introduce as new evidence an affidavit from Detective
Inspector Robert Matthews, the officer in charge of the
Ontario Provincial Police child-pornography unit.
Det.-Insp. Matthews said that if possession of child
pornography is made legal, "police would be completely
stymied in their efforts to combat the spread of child
pornography", which is speeding up because of the
He said that before child-pornography legislation was
passed in 1993, police found it almost impossible to
investigate and prosecute people for collecting and
disseminating pornographic material involving children,
and were making only one or two arrests a year in
"After passage of Bill C-128, this number skyrocketed.
In 1998 alone, Project 'P' (the child pornography unit)
handled as many as 134 investigations and prosecutions",
"I verily believe that the principal reason for this
dramatic change was the inclusion of possession of child
pornography as a criminal offence."
Det.-Insp. Matthews said that without the legislation
that is now under scrutiny, "the fight against child
pornography will be greatly undermined at the very time
that the spread of such offensive material is increasing
The legislation was cast in doubt last January in a case
against John Robin Sharpe, a retired town planner who
was arrested after a raid on his Vancouver apartment.
Mr. Sharpe, who initially represented himself in court,
won a victory when Duncan Shaw, a B.C. Supreme Court
judge, ruled the state had violated his right to privacy
and freedom of expression when they entered his
apartment and seized pornographic material, much of
which he'd written himself.
Within weeks of the ruling, the courts in B.C. had
turned aside 18 other child-pornography cases, saying
they could not deal with them until appeal courts made
it clear whether or not the legislation was valid.
That question brought a dozen lawyers and three judges
to the Vancouver courthouse yesterday, as John Gordon
and Kate Ker opened arguments for the Crown.
Mr. Gordon said that child pornography not only exploits
the children who are depicted in the photographs and
videos, but the material plays an important role in
"grooming" other children for seduction.
He said pornographic material is frequently used by
paedophiles as a tool for lowering the inhibitions of
future child victims.
He cited the case of one man, identified only as K.L.B.,
who was arrested after he was found in possession of a
pornographic photo of a five-year-old girl, which he had
been showing to a two-year-old girl.
Mr. Gordon said that in the Sharpe case, the Supreme
Court judge erred in focusing on the privacy rights of
an individual, and neglecting to adequately consider the
rights of children who could be exploited by exposure to
He said the threat of pornography is increasing because
of the expansion of the Internet, which allows such easy
"This is an underground market", he said. "Not only is
it underground, it is clandestine and, through the
medium of the Internet, it is anonymous."
Mr. Gordon said that one argument against criminalizing
the possession of pornography is that it might make it
illegal to explore issues surrounding the topic of child
"You can explore the issue of youth sexuality without
pornographic pictures and stories", he said. "You don't
need that . . . You just don't need the dirty pictures,
you don't need the dirty stories."
But Justice Mary Southin, one of three judges hearing
the case, which is expected to end today, told him that
society's definitions change, often dramatically and in
short periods of time.
She noted that Lady Chatterly's Lover was once
considered shockingly pornographic, but now isn't.
"It's all dreadful stuff . . . and badly written", she
said of the pornographic material seized by police in a
raid on Mr. Sharpe's home.
"I don't think Lady Chatterly's much of a book, either.
(But) I don't know how you draw the distinction."
She said just because some people find the subject
matter offensive, that's no reason to throw a blanket
ban over a subject.
"There are graphic books written about rape and all
sorts of things, but we don't ban them", she said.
Mr. Gordon argued that there is no excuse for any
material, written or graphic, that promotes sexual
offences against children.
"There is no good child pornography", he stated.
"Like hate literature, it deserves only marginal
Justice Southin also expressed concern about the
definition of "children", saying that while the
legislation establishes the age of consent at 14, that
seems to be out of step with some of the things
happening in the world.
Judge Southin asked the Crown why some of the children
depicted in the Sharpe pornography case are considered
exploited, when it appears they posed for sexually
graphic pictures for profit.
"Whether we like it or not, isn't it a fair assumption
that they did it for money?" she asked.
She also noted that some of the children appeared to be
from Third World countries, and wondered what legal
grounds Canada had for being concerned about them.
"What are we doing pontificating about street kids in
Brazil?" she asked in a provocative exchange. When Ms.
Ker, Mr. Gordon's co-counsel, replied that Canada had
international obligations, Justice Southin fired back:
"We don't have international obligations to stop kids
starving to death in the streets of Brazil, do we?"
Ms. Ker said Canadians should not be involved in
exploiting children in Brazil or anywhere.
But Judge Southin said concepts such as integrity and
autonomy are often dictated by economic realities, and
poor children -- like poor women who are forced into
prostitution -- might have different views than those
held by white, middle-class Canadians.
"That's the trouble with these arguments", she said.
"They all sound fine until you start looking at the real
Judge Southin suggested that perhaps the views Canadians
have about child pornography may change over time,
perhaps to the point where it becomes acceptable.
"It has not reached that stage and it appears unlikely
that it will", replied Ms. Ker.
Judge Southin also questioned Mr. Gordon about the
effectiveness of the child-pornography laws, saying
while they may make it easier to arrest and prosecute
adults, that doesn't necessarily mean they do much to
"Will it work?" she asked.
"These sound like all the arguments around in the United
States for prohibition . . . It made it worse."
She noted that the sexual exploitation of children was a
fact long before the Internet emerged, and appears to
have little to do with the dissemination of pictures or
"People offended against children in Roman times, when
practically nobody could read or write except for the
upper classes", she said.
"It will continue to exist in our society", replied Mr.
Gordon. "(But) we cannot throw up our hands and say
'What's the point?' "
Madam Justice Southin not known to back down Outspoken judge
doesn't shy away from speaking mind
Susanne Hiller National Post
Ian Lindsay, The Vancouver Sun
John Robin Sharpe outside the B.C. Court of Appeal in
Vancouver yesterday after the court upheld the dismissal of
charges against him of possession of child pornography.
Madam Justice Mary Southin, a veteran of the British Columbia
Court of Appeal, is considered by the legal community in
Vancouver to be a tough, single-minded judge who has a history
of making controversial statements.
"She is considered here to be a respected, hard-working judge
who has, what I would call, a scholarly approach to the law,"
said Tom Woods, editor of The Advocate, the Vancouver law
"She's a tough judge. She expects council to be well prepared
and to perform to a high standard. She's single minded and is
someone who is not afraid of shrinking from a decision that she
may anticipate being unpopular.
"She has a very direct manner, and a very direct way of
expressing herself," Mr. Woods said. "She is not known to back
down. She doesn't always find herself in agreement with the rest
of the panel."
Judge Southin made headlines in April when she said society's
views toward child pornography may change over time, perhaps to
the point where it becomes acceptable.
"We have to recognize that our views about these matters might
change radically," she said during the first day of the appeal
hearing of the ruling that legalized the possession of child
pornography in B.C.
She noted that Lady Chatterly's Lover was once considered
pornographic, but now isn't. Her questions during the hearing
shocked many in the courtroom. She asked, for example, whether
teenagers who are 14 to 17 can still be considered children, and
why some of the children depicted in the pornography case
involving John Robin Sharpe are considered exploited when it
appears they posed for sexually graphic photos for profit.
"Whether we like it or not, isn't a fair assumption that they
did it for the money?" she asked.
Judge Southin also wondered what legal grounds Canada had for
being concerned about children in Third World countries.
"What are we doing pontificating about street kids in Brazil?"
she asked. ". . . We don't have international obligations to
stop kids starving to death in the streets of Brazil?"
Judge Southin graduated from the University of British
Columbia's law school in 1952 and has been on the court of
appeal since 1988.
In 1997, the parents of a teenage girl filed a formal complaint
to B.C Chief Justice Allan McEachern and Canadian Judicial
Council, over comments Judge Southin made when she threw out an
former teacher's sexual assault convictions.
The complaint said "atrocious" comments were made by the judge
during the appeal of Ian Crocker, a former Mayne Island teacher.
The parents' letter quoted Judge Southin as saying, "What's the
matter with parents on Mayne Island to let their children go on
a camping trip with only one adult?"
The letter also complains Judge Southin said: "Let us keep in
mind that these are not severe assaults such as brutal rape or
buggery of little boys."
In an article printed in a 1995 issue of The Advocate, published
by the Vancouver Bar Association, Judge Southin argued that the
current justice system is "not helping to prevent young people
from becoming killers."
"Sometimes," she wrote, "I have the uneasy feeling that to some
who are concerned in the administration of justice, the taking
of life is of no special significance -- to kill a man or to
kill his dog is all of the same moral quality."
In the article, she argued that children's' names should not be
protected under the Young Offenders Act. The act, she wrote, is
"one of the law's sillier provisions, at least in cases of
She said children should not have the right to remain silent and
suggested that the Young Offenders Act should treat troubled
youths the same way good parents treat their children.
"A wise parent who suspects his child is up to no good does his
best to ferret out the truth," she said. "He does not advise the
child that he has a right to remain silent. He does not ask for
a warrant to confine his erring offspring to the house. He
admits of no right of appeal."
In 1988, Peter Brown, chairman of Canarim Investment Corp. Ltd.,
complained embarrassing comments made by Judge Southin damaged
his reputation. The comments were made during an investments
trial, in which Mr. Brown's company was a third party in the
proceedings. Judge Southin questioned a $120,000 cheque that was
paid to Mr. Brown for introducing a group of financial
"Doesn't seem to bear any rational resemblance to rational and
decent human behaviour at all, does it?" the judge asked.
David Roberts, a Vancouver lawyer who has known Mary Southin for
45 years, had this to say about the Sharpe ruling:
"I think that this decision shows a fair amount of intellectual
integrity because she certainly would not take kindly to child
"She would abhor it. But she had the courage to decide what she
perceives as right, in light of the Charter [of Rights and
Freedoms], whether she likes it or not."
"She is a very intelligent person and the legal community views
her that way, she has the memory of an elephant," he added. "She
is fairly straitlaced and has a very perceptive view on the
difference between right and wrong. She is quite plain spoken."
Protected Pedophiles in Public Office, Satanic Ritual Abuse
(SRA) of Children, CIA's drug running & child prostitution to
sting / subvert / assassinate Politicians, Franklin Cover-up,
Barney Frank, Poppa Bush
Our position is that the
"Hate Crimes" legislation must be
repealed, and that Pedophiles must not remain the protected
class they have obviously become. The crime of a
Pedophile must be limited to what they do with a
child, however, and not what they do with their imagination.
"Roger Morneau was involved in demon worship, lived in that
world for many months, and escaped alive".
FYI: A member has described a Luciferian Judge (retired)
who calls him up from time to time to discourage him with
Luciferian threats. Morneau's description fo the
"misunderstanding" that had Lucifer cast out of heaven, and
Lucifer's inevitable world conquest / NWO matches that of the
retired Judge as it was related to us by the member.
BCTF = BC Teachers Federation:
Globalist Propaganda Machine, "Its OK to be Gay"
Federation will be dropping the prohibitions on Teachers having
sex with Students. They are too costly to retain when BC
Courts routinely dismiss charges against the Pedophile Teachers we
Recall that when a BC Teacher is impregnated by a FOURTEEN year
old boy, BC Courts have ordered HIS PARENTS to pay the Teacher
insists the parents are not permitted to know their Child is
sexually active, or who in the school is coaching their Child.
Federation will be dropping the prohibitions on Teachers having
sex with Students. They are too costly to retain when BC
Courts routinely dismiss charges against the Pedophile Teachers we
Sexual psychopath. His
'data' mostly came from sexual psychopaths, sex offenders,
criminals, pedophiles, male prostitutes, and promiscuous
homosexuals. Two of his "co-investigators" were serial
Rex King, convicted of 800 counts of child rape involving
both sexes, and
Fritz von Balluseck, an ex-Nazi convicted of the rape-murder
of a ten-year-old girl in Berlin
Kinsey solicited and encouraged pedophiles, at home and abroad,
to sexually violate from 317 to 2,035 infants and children for
his alleged data on normal "child sexuality."
Lawyers consistently estimate the homosexual fraction of
the Law Societies & Judiciaries as "forty-something" percent.
That is, a randomly selected Judge or Lawyer is about thirty
times more likely to be homosexual than the population at large
July 14, 1889, the "grand pontiff" of universal free masonry,
Albert Pike, issued instructions to the 23 supreme councils
of the world. He said,
"That which we
must say to the crowd is: We worship a god, but it is the god
that one adores without superstition." And he also said,
"To you sovereign grand inspectors general, we say this, that
you may repeat it to the brethren of the 32nd, 31st and 30th
the Masonic Religion should be by all of
us initiates of the high degrees, maintained in the purity of
the Luciferian doctrine."
And again said, "If
Lucifer were not God, would Adonay (Jesus - God of
Christians)... calumniate [speak evil of] him?" -
"Yes, Lucifer is God..."
Disclaimer: EqualParenting-BC.Ca encourages exercising democratic
rights such as the freedom of expression, but does not by association or
reference to other materials condone or sanction violence or hatred.